Talk:Chem395:February 1 discussion

+ is this working?

I'm hereMurphy44 16:38, 1 February 2008 (EST)

I'm not sure if we still have class today with classes after 2pm being canceled. I thought that with no "classroom" that we were probably still still responsible for being hereMurphy44 16:41, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Yes we are. Walkerma 16:41, 1 February 2008 (EST)

• How should we respond to the threat of global warming? (We = humanity, and also we = the people in this class) Remember that we have limited money to spend! So where should we put the bulk of our money - into climate change prevention, or into preparing for the inevitable change. Should we hunker down for the hot weather, and buy a holiday home on high ground near Hudson Bay? Or should we spend our money trying to curb greenhouse gas emissions in order to make the change more controllable?

Discussion

Excellent, I feel that using all of the worlds resources to prepare for what seems to be the inevitable heat wave is foolish. It is like throwing in the towel, we have created this problem, isn't it our obligation to try to fix as much as we can?Murphy44 16:45, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Furthermore, we have some wonderful technologies that can help to combat things like greenhouse gases, why not use them to our fullest and try to save what we can wile we canMurphy44 16:47, 1 February 2008 (EST)

I guess my last entry didnt go through....I was saying that if immediate prevention and preparation methods are put in place now it will foster economic opportunities. J-Fed 16:48, 1 February 2008 (EST)

This all sounds good but can we really hold off the "inevitable?" Tell us some of the "wonderful technologies." Walkerma 16:49, 1 February 2008 (EST)

I agree, new economic opportunities are out there in the area of developing and implanting green technology. Murphy44 16:51, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Can you give some specific weblinks to specific technologies you could use? Walkerma 16:52, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Technologies such as alternative fuel sources. Fossil fuels are running out rapidly and our dependency upon them will need to as well. The development of these alternative fuel sources such as solar, and wind power will need to be improved and this could result in new economic opportunities. Murphy44 16:55, 1 February 2008 (EST)

You mean like this and this? Walkerma 16:57, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Exactly, or on a residential level something like this - [1] Murphy44 17:00, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Any steps we can take to curb our use of nonrenewable energy sources is a step in the right direction. Murphy44 17:00, 1 February 2008 (EST)

But why bother? Wouldn't Potsdam be a lot nicer with a climate like North Carolina? All this business of trying to stop global warming seems silly to me. It sounds like a big improvement to me. DevilsAdvocate 17:02, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Well hello devils advocate, This is an interesting view you have, what would you tell the people that live in western Europe when their climate changes dramatically in the colder direction? Due to the north Atlantic current shutting down. Murphy44 17:06, 1 February 2008 (EST)

This is GLOBAL warming, not just Potsdam warming. Thus the whole globe will feel the results, what may be good for us here will be devastating to other regions. Murphy44 17:08, 1 February 2008 (EST)

What about portions of the globe that will end up under water, many of them our cities where large populations of people live? Murphy44 17:09, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Well I know a guy from northern England, actually, and some predictions say that that area could have a climate like the French Riviera. Sounds good to me! Better than that dreary weather they used to have. OK, some will win, some will lose, that's just the way Nature works. DevilsAdvocate 17:12, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Ahh I see, so a survival of the fittest situation. Won't that bring about wars for resources, one main reason wars have been fought historically? Seems to me that if we try to fix what we can now all of this could be avoided. Murphy44 17:13, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Good point! It could cost us much more to do nothing, than it costs us to do something (both financial and human costs), IMHO. Walkerma 17:16, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Exactly, a stitch in time saves nine Murphy44 17:18, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Doing nothing to curve the problem would be devastatingly foolish in the furture. Murphy44 17:20, 1 February 2008 (EST)

In case you were wondering, DA was taking some of the viewpoints of Lomborg and distorting them. Walkerma 17:21, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Another skeptic! I notice he has a political science background, looks like he studied a lot of politics and not much science. Murphy44 17:24, 1 February 2008 (EST)

OK, but shouldn't we spend money on helping people fix their social problems instead? It's OK for you in the rich West to be spending $20,000 on your fancy hybrid car, but that money could be much better spent helping starving people in Africa, if you ask me. DevilsAdvocate 17:23, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Oh I don't disagree at all, we need to get the priorities straitened out. Dorf made note of this in chapter 1, his analogy was that it's more important to make sure trucks and trains are always loaded with freight then it is to improve their fuel economy. Much like it is more important that developing nations start now with green technology then wait until later. Murphy44 17:28, 1 February 2008 (EST)

As for the starving people, we as a nation of great prosperity need to step up and help out as much as we can. Murphy44 17:30, 1 February 2008 (EST)

+ why wont it let me talk?????????????? J-Fed 17:26, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Jesse: It's probably that Devil's Advocate guy, he knows you would shoot down his arguments. Walkerma 17:31, 1 February 2008 (EST)

There needs to be reserch on geothermal energy and partnerships between companies need to be supported, We need to learn from our lessons and see what the impacts have been. The scarcity of resources needs to be a proirity for us because it shapes our economy. More incentives for businesses needs to become satisfactory to the general public because they are in essence paying for these impacts. More funding for research needs to occur, particulary biotechnology so that we can provides cheaper more economical means for suppling our own food and those for developing countries. The numbers dont lie on Dorff page 363 last paragraph it says: "There is no question that reducing poulation numbers over the next 100 years too approxomitely two billion, so that everyone on earth can enjoy a relatively high standard of living, will infringe on our freedom to reproduce. However, this freedom to reproduce can infringe on our freedoms from malnourosment, hunger, diseases, polutions, and poverty. J-Fed 17:36, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Well said! Walkerma 17:39, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Agreed, the problem is getting people to buy into that philosophy and then having them actually practice it. Murphy44 17:41, 1 February 2008 (EST)

There need to be strategies for food supplies - we already have some green processes availiable. We need to conserve resources through new means. Using the excess heat from power plants for example. Reduce consumption, be aggressive in supporting the integration of the public and private sedtors of the economy for research. There needs to be internation and national accessiblility and remanufacturing. Even though these things may cost more in the short-term, in the long run we wil be much better off. J-Fed 17:39, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Right, pay up front now and reap the benefits later. Murphy44 17:43, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Can we control energy use? Shouldn't we tackle this problem first by focusing on the one thing that is absoulutely necessary for humans? Food. And then Transportation right? Then lighting, then the other things? I think we are taking too much for granted and are focusing in the wrong areas. We should be looking at a smaller subset of technologies instead of hundreds at once. J-Fed 17:42, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Innovation needs to become a forefront of our initiatives, whether its for the environment, or technology. Companies need to look at their design practices for making products. J-Fed 17:44, 1 February 2008 (EST)

OK we should draw things to a close. Walkerma 17:42, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Good discussionMurphy44 17:43, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Jesse, that will be the topic for the next two units - science and technology! Thanks! Walkerma 17:46, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks a lot guys, it's been fun! Feel free to add to these comments over the coming few days. You can start a new section using the + tab, and type in the title of the new section. Cheers, Walkerma 17:47, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Food for thought

If we are going to tackle global warming, it has to be more than gestures. This article in the Guardian struck me as excellent, it gets to the heart of the issue. Read it at your leisure! Walkerma 22:08, 1 February 2008 (EST)